House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2008, with 64% of the vote.
Committees of the House November 25th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the acceptance of the House on that last motion. Pursuant to Standing Order 66(2)(a), I would like to designate Thursday, November 26, which is tomorrow, as the day to continue the debate on the motion to concur in the seventh report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates presented on Wednesday, June 17, 2009.
Bill C-36 November 25th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I present this motion on behalf of my colleague the chief government whip. There have been discussions between all parties and I think you will find unanimous consent for the following motion:
That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practices of the House, if the recorded division on the amendment to the third reading motion of Bill C-36, An Act to amend the Criminal Code is negatived, the Speaker shall immediately put the question on the third reading motion of Bill C-36 without further debate or amendment.
Child Protection Act (Online Sexual Exploitation) November 24th, 2009
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-58, An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Points of Order November 20th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I recognize that all too often during the heat of debate in question period things are said that people afterwards might think that they wished they had not said.
During question period today, when the hon. Minister of Transport was replying to the supplementary question from the member for Malpeque, the official opposition House leader said, “What do you want, a body bag?”
I want to give my hon. colleague from Wascana the opportunity to withdraw those words. I think they are completely over the line. I recognize that sometimes it is a heated debate in this place, but with all due respect I think that was clearly way over the line.
Privilege November 19th, 2009
Exactly. The member is calling it propaganda because he cannot dispute that they are facts and they are the facts that are before the House.
With regard to the issue that the NDP member for Windsor West raised about a question of privilege that he raised on a similar issue dealing with a mailing on November 3, 2005, Mr. Speaker, you made a ruling in that regard and I would just like to remind you and the House of some of the things that you said at that time:
I am concerned that members are continuing to rise on questions of privilege relating to householders and ten percenters. I take these matters very seriously, in particular when reputations of members are being brought into question. That being said, as with the previous cases, I do not believe that it is for the Chair to pronounce on the content of these documents or whether they conform to the guidelines found in the Members’ Allowances and Services Manual.
Mr. Speaker, that is what you said, and quite rightly so, because it gets into a debate about whether something is appropriate or something else.
The main reason I wanted to rise is because it is important for Canadians to understand that it is not only the Conservative Party that sends out these types of mailings. Indeed, it was only recently that a member of the Liberal Party had to apologize for one that was sent out in her name about the current H1N1 crisis targeting first nations communities in a very derogatory way.
Mr. Speaker, I want to lay the facts again on the table for your consideration. All parties are participating in this and for the member for Windsor West to stand and somehow pretend that his party does not do this, it is important to note that the New Democrats do not even use mass mailings. They actually put it in a first class envelope and send it to people's homes, the very same type of ten percenters that incur a lot more cost to Canadians because it is franked mail in an envelope as opposed to a mass mailing.
My point is that all parties are participating in this type of communication and it is grossly unfair to suggest that it is only the Conservative Party that is doing so.
Privilege November 19th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I do not want to prolong this but it is important that some balance be brought to this discussion.
With regard to the remarks just made by the member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, I would point out that at no point in time did he dispute the facts of what was reported at the time that the conference was taking place, and that is what the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister was trying to lay upon the table.
I find it quite astounding that my colleague, the whip from the Bloc Québécois, a man for whom I have a lot of respect, would stand in his place and say that the facts are irrelevant because that is exactly at the heart of what the remarks of the hon. member for Mount Royal were about. He was disputing the facts that were in this ten percenter.
Mr. Speaker, it is important that you know the facts if you are going to--
Business of the House November 19th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, today we will continue with Bill C-57, Canada-Jordan Free Trade Act.
If we were to complete that, I would intend to call Bill C-23, Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act. I would point out to my colleagues that this bill has already received more than 30 hours of debate in the House and yet the NDP and the Bloc continue to delay the proceedings and hold up this agreement that would create new business opportunities for Canadians from coast to coast.
As I indicated this morning, tomorrow will be an allotted day.
Next week we will once again focus on our justice agenda beginning with the report and third reading stage of Bill C-36, An Act to amend the Criminal Code followed by Bill C-31, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act and the Identification of Criminals Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act. Then we will have Bill C-54, Protecting Canadians by Ending Sentence Discounts for Multiple Murders Act; Bill C-55, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the response to the Supreme Court of Canada Decision in R. v. Shoker act; Bill C-19, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (investigative hearing and recognizance with conditions); Bill C-53, Protecting Canadians by Ending Early Release for Criminals Act and finally, Bill C-35, Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act. All of these bills are at second reading.
On the issue of a NAFO debate, I would remind the hon. House leader for the Liberal Party that is what opposition days are for.
Business of Supply November 19th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, this is not really a motion, but out of respect for the House I would like to designate tomorrow as an allotted day. While I should have designated it earlier, the House should be aware that the Bloc Québécois was notified on Tuesday.
The Environment November 17th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, as I have said before in this chamber, there is no minister for big oil in this government. Therefore, there will not be any minister responding to that silly question.
Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act November 17th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
An agreement could not be reached under the provisions of Standing Orders 78(1) or 78(2) with respect to the second reading stage of Bill C-23, An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Colombia, the Agreement on the Environment between Canada and the Republic of Colombia and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Colombia.
Therefore under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that a minister of the crown will propose at the next sitting a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at the said stage.